Basic Business Statistics: Analysis of Variance

Basic Business Statistics
(9th Edition)
Chapter 11
Analysis of Variance
© 2004 Prentice-Hall, Inc. Chap 11-1

Chapter Topics
 The Completely Randomized Design:
One-Way Analysis of Variance
 ANOVA Assumptions
 F Test for Differences in More than Two Means
 The Tukey-Kramer Procedure
 Levene’s Test for Homogeneity of Variance
 The Randomized Block Design
 F Test for the Difference in More than Two Means
 The Tukey Procedure
Chap 11-2
© 2004 Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Chapter Topics (continued)
 The Factorial Design: Two-Way Analysis of

Variance
 Examine Effects of Factors and Interaction
 Kruskal-Wallis Rank Test: Nonparametric
Analysis for the Completely Randomized
Design
 Friedman Rank Test: Nonparametric Analysis
for the Randomized Block Design
Chap 11-3
General Experimental Setting
 Investigator Controls One or More
Independent Variables
 Called treatment variables or factors
 Each treatment factor contains two or more groups
(or levels)
 Observe Effects on Dependent Variable
 Response to groups (or levels) of independent
variable
 Experimental Design: The Plan Used to Test
Hypothesis
Chap 11-4
Completely Randomized Design
 Experimental Units (Subjects) are Assigned
Randomly to Groups
 Subjects are assumed to be homogeneous
 Only One Factor or Independent Variable
 With 2 or more groups (or levels)
 Analyzed by One-Way Analysis of Variance
(ANOVA)
Chap 11-5
Completely Randomized Design
Example
Factor (Training Method)

Factor Levels
(Groups)
Randomly
Assigned 
  
   
Units
21 hrs 17 hrs 31 hrs
Dependent
Variable 27 hrs 25 hrs 28 hrs
(Response)
Chap 11-6
One-Way Analysis of Variance
F Test
 Evaluate the Difference Among the Mean
Responses of 2 or More (c ) Populations
 E.g., Several types of tires, oven temperature settings
 Assumptions
 Samples are randomly and independently drawn
 This condition must be met
 Populations are normally distributed
 F Test is robust to moderate departure from normality
 Populations have equal variances

 Less sensitive to this requirement when samples are
of equal size from each population
Chap 11-7
Why ANOVA?
 Could Compare the Means One Pair at a Time
Using t Test for Difference of Means
 Each t Test Contains Type I Error
 The Total Type I Error with k Pairs of Means
is 1- (1 - ) k
 E.g., If there are 5 means and use = .05
 Must perform 10 comparisons
 Type I Error is 1 – (.95) 10 = .40
 40% of the time you will reject the null hypothesis
of equal means in favor of the alternative when the
null hypothesis is true!
Chap 11-8
Hypotheses of One-Way ANOVA

H 0 : 1   2     c
 All population means are equal
 No treatment effect (no variation in means among
groups)
 H1 : Not all  j are the same
 At least one population mean is different (others
may be the same!)
 There is a treatment effect
 Does not mean that all population means are
different
Chap 11-9
One-Way ANOVA
(No Treatment Effect)
H 0 : 1   2     c
H1 : Not all  j are the same
The Null
Hypothesis is
True
1   2  3
Chap 11-10
One-Way ANOVA
(Treatment Effect Present)
H 0 : 1   2     c
H1 : Not all  j are the same The Null
Hypothesis is
NOT True
1   2  3 1   2  3
Chap 11-11
One-Way ANOVA
(Partition of Total Variation)
Total Variation SST
Variation Due to Variation Due to Random

= Group SSA + Sampling SSW
Commonly referred to as: Commonly referred to as:
 Among Group Variation  Within Group Variation
 Sum of Squares Among  Sum of Squares Within
 Sum of Squares Between  Sum of Squares Error
 Sum of Squares Model  Sum of Squares Unexplained
 Sum of Squares Explained
 Sum of Squares Treatment
Chap 11-12
Total Variation
c nj
SST   ( X ij  X ) 2
j 1 i 1
X ij : the i -th observation in group j

n j : the number of observations in group j
n : the total number of observations in all groups
c : the number of groups
c nj
 X
j 1 i 1
ij
X  the overall or grand mean

n Chap 11-13
Total Variation (continued)
   X   
2 2 2
SST  X 11  X 21 X    X nc c  X
Response, X
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

Chap 11-14
Among-Group Variation
c
SSA   n j ( X j  X ) 2 SSA
MSA 
j 1 c 1
X j : The sample mean of group j

X : The overall or grand mean
 j  j' Variation Due to Differences Among Groups
Chap 11-15
Among-Group Variation(continued)
     
2 2 2
SSA  n1 X 1  X  n2 X 2  X    nc X c  X
Response, X
X2 X3
X
X1

Chap 11-16
Within-Group Variation
nj
c
SSW
SSW   ( X ij  X j ) 2
MSW 
j 1 i 1 nc
X j : The sample mean of group j
X ij : The i -th observation in group j
Summing the variation

within each group and then
adding over all groups
j
Chap 11-17
Within-Group Variation(continued)
SSW   X 11  X 1    X 21  X 1     X nc c  X c  
2 2 2
Response, X
X2 X3
X
X1

Chap 11-18
Within-Group Variation(continued)
SSW For c = 2, this is the
MSW  pooled-variance in the
nc t test.
(n1  1) S1  (n2  1) S2      (nc  1) Sc
2 2 2

(n1  1)  (n2  1)      (nc  1)
•If more than 2 groups,
use F Test.
•For 2 groups, use t test.
F Test more limited.
j
Chap 11-19
One-Way ANOVA
F Test Statistic
 Test Statistic
MSA
F

MSW
 MSA is mean squares among
 MSW is mean squares within
 Degrees of Freedom
 df1  c  1

df 2  n  c
Chap 11-20
One-Way ANOVA
Summary Table
Degrees Mean
Source of Sum of F
of Squares
Variation Squares Statistic
Freedom (Variance)
Among MSA =
c–1 SSA MSA/MSW
(Factor) SSA/(c – 1 )
Within MSW =
n–c SSW
(Error) SSW/(n – c )
SST =
Total n–1
SSA + SSW
Chap 11-21
Features of One-Way ANOVA
F Statistic
 The F Statistic is the Ratio of the Among
Estimate of Variance and the Within Estimate
of Variance
 The ratio must always be positive
 df1 = c -1 will typically be small
 df2 = n - c will typically be large
 The Ratio Should Be Close to 1 if the Null is
True
Chap 11-22
Features of One-Way ANOVA
F Statistic (continued)
 If the Null Hypothesis is False

 The numerator should be greater than the
denominator
 The ratio should be larger than 1
Chap 11-23
One-Way ANOVA F Test
Example
As production manager, you Machine1 Machine2

want to see if 3 filling Machine3
machines have different mean 25.40 23.40 20.00
filling times. You assign 15 26.31 21.80 22.20
similarly trained & experienced 24.10 23.50 19.75
workers, 5 per machine, to 23.74 22.75 20.60
the machines. At the .05
25.10 21.60 20.40
significance level, is there a
difference in mean filling
times?
Chap 11-24
One-Way ANOVA Example:
Scatter Diagram
Machine1 Machine2 27
Time in Seconds
Machine3 •
26
25.40 23.40 20.00 ••
26.31 21.80 22.20 25 X1
24 •
24.10 23.50 19.75 • ••
23.74 22.75 20.60 23 •
X2 • X
25.10 21.60 20.40 22 ••
21
X 1  24.93 X 2  22.61 •• X3
20 ••
X 3  20.59 X  22.71 19
Chap 11-25
One-Way ANOVA Example
Computations
Machine1 Machine2 Machine3 X 1  24.93 nj  5
25.40 23.40 20.00
26.31 21.80 22.20 X 2  22.61 c3
24.10 23.50 19.75 X 3  20.59 n  15
23.74 22.75 20.60
25.10 21.60 20.40 X  22.71
SSA  5  24.93  22.71   22.61  22.71   20.59  22.71 

 2 2 2
 
 47.164
SSW  4.2592  3.112  3.682  11.0532
MSA  SSA /( c -1)  47.1640 / 2  23.5820
MSW  SSW /(n - c )  11.0532 /12  .9211
Chap 11-26
Summary Table
Degrees Mean
Source of Sum of F
of Squares
Variation Squares Statistic
Freedom (Variance)
Among MSA/MSW
3-1=2 47.1640 23.5820
(Factor) =25.60
Within
15-3=12 11.0532 .9211
(Error)
Total 15-1=14 58.2172
Chap 11-27
One-Way ANOVA Example
Solution
Test Statistic:
H0: 1 = 2 = 3
H1: Not All Equal MSA 23.5820
 = .05 F   25.6
df1= 2 df2 = 12
MSW .9211
Decision:
Critical Value(s):
Reject at  = 0.05.
 = 0.05 Conclusion:
There is evidence that at
least one  j differs from
0 3.89 F the rest.
Chap 11-28
Solution in Excel
 Use Tools | Data Analysis | ANOVA: Single
Factor
 Excel Worksheet that Performs the One-Factor
ANOVA of the Example
Microsoft Excel
Worksheet
Chap 11-29
The Tukey-Kramer Procedure
 Tells which Population Means are Significantly
Different
 E.g., 1 = 2  3 f(X)
 2 groups whose means
may be significantly
different 1= 2 3 X
 Post Hoc (A Posteriori) Procedure
 Done after rejection of equal means in ANOVA
 Pairwise Comparisons
 Compare absolute mean differences with critical range
Chap 11-30
The Tukey-Kramer Procedure:
Example
1. Compute absolute mean
Machine1 Machine2 Machine3 differences:
25.40 23.40 20.00
X 1  X 2  24.93  22.61  2.32
26.31 21.80 22.20
24.10 23.50 19.75 X 1  X 3  24.93  20.59  4.34
23.74 22.75 20.60
25.10 21.60 20.40 X 2  X 3  22.61  20.59  2.02
2. Compute critical range:
MSW 1 1 
Critical Range  QU ( c ,n c )     1.618
2  nj nj' 
3. All of the absolute mean differences are greater than
the critical range. There is a significant difference between
each pair of means at the 5% level of significance.
Chap 11-31
Solution in PHStat
 Use PHStat | c-Sample Tests | Tukey-Kramer
Procedure …
 Excel Worksheet that Performs the Tukey-
Kramer Procedure for the Previous Example
Microsoft Excel
Worksheet
Chap 11-32
Levene’s Test for
Homogeneity of Variance
 The Null Hypothesis
 H 0 :  12   22     c2
 The c population variances are all equal
 The Alternative Hypothesis
 H : Not all 
j are equal ( j  1, 2,  , c )
2
1
 Not all the c population variances are equal
Chap 11-33
Levene’s Test for Homogeneity
of Variance: Procedure
1. For each observation in each group, obtain

the absolute value of the difference between
each observation and the median of the
group.
2. Perform a one-way analysis of variance on
these absolute differences.
Chap 11-34
Levene’s Test for Homogeneity
of Variances: Example
As production manager, you Machine1 Machine2

want to see if 3 filling Machine3
machines have different 25.40 23.40 20.00
variance in filling times. You 26.31 21.80 22.20
assign 15 similarly trained & 24.10 23.50 19.75
experienced workers, 5 per 23.74 22.75 20.60
machine, to the machines. At
25.10 21.60 20.40
the .05 significance level, is
there a difference in the
variance in filling times?
Chap 11-35
Levene’s Test:
Absolute Difference from the Median
Time abs(Time - median(Time))

Machine1 Machine2 Machine3 Machine1 Machine2 Machine3
25.4 23.4 20 0.3 0.65 0.4
26.31 21.8 22.2 1.21 0.95 1.8
24.1 23.5 19.75 1 0.75 0.65
23.74 22.75 20.6 1.36 0 0.2
25.1 21.6 20.4 0 1.15 0
median 25.1 22.75 20.4
Chap 11-36
Summary Table
SUMMARY
Groups Count Sum Average Variance
Machine1 5 3.87 0.774 0.35208
Machine2 5 3.5 0.7 0.19
Machine3 5 3.05 0.61 0.5005
ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 0.067453 2 0.033727 0.097048 0.908218 3.88529
Within Groups 4.17032 12 0.347527
Total 4.237773 14
Chap 11-37
Levene’s Test Example:
Solution
H0:  12   22   32 Test Statistic:

 = .05
F   0.0970
MSW 0.3475
df1= 2 df2 = 12
Decision:
Critical Value(s): Do not reject at  = 0.05.
There is no evidence that
at least one  j differs
2
0 3.89 F from the rest.

Chap 11-38
Randomized Blocked Design
 Items are Divided into Blocks
 Individual items in different samples are matched, or
repeated measurements are taken
 Reduced within group variation (i.e., remove the effect
of block before testing)
 Response of Each Treatment Group is Obtained
 Assumptions
 Same as completely randomized design
 No interaction effect between treatments and blocks
Chap 11-39
Randomized Blocked Design
(Example)
Factor (Training Method)
Factor Levels
(Groups)
Blocked   
Experiment   
Units
  
Dependent
Variable 27 hrs 25 hrs 28 hrs
(Response)
Chap 11-40
Randomized Block Design
(Partition of Total Variation)
Variation Due Commonly referred to as:
to Group  Sum of Squares Among
SSA  Among Groups Variation
+
Variation Commonly referred to as:
Variation Among  Sum of Squares Among
Among All Blocks Blocks
Observations = SSBL
SST +
Variation Due Commonly referred to as:
to Random  Sum of Squares Error
Sampling  Sum of Squares
SSW Unexplained
Chap 11-41
Total Variation
 
c r 2
SST   X ij  X
j 1 i 1
r  the number of blocks

c  the number of groups or levels
n  the total number of observations  n  rc 
X ij  the value in the i -th block for the j -th treatment level
X i  the mean of all values in block i
X  j  the mean of all values for treatment level j
df  n  1
Chap 11-42
Among-Group Variation
 
c 2
SSA  r  X  j  X
j 1
r
X ij
X j  i 1
(treatment group means)
r
df  c  1
SSA
MSA 
c 1
Chap 11-43
Among-Block Variation
 
r 2
SSBL  c  X i  X
i 1
c
X
j 1
ij
X i  (block means)
c
df  r  1
SSBL
MSBL 
r 1
Chap 11-44
Random Error
 
c r 2
SSE   X ij  X i  X  j  X
j 1 i 1
df   r  1  c  1
SSE
MSE 
 r  1  c  1
Chap 11-45
Randomized Block F Test for
Differences in c Means

H 0 : 1  2       c
 No treatment effect

H1 : Not all  j are equal
 Test Statistic Reject

MSA
F 
MSE
 Degrees of Freedom

df1  c  1 0 FU F
df 2   r  1  c  1

Chap 11-46
Summary Table
Source of Degrees of Sum of Mean F

Variation Freedom Squares Squares Statistic
Among MSA = MSA/

c–1 SSA
Groups SSA/(c – 1) MSE
Among MSBL = MSBL/

r–1 SSBL
Blocks SSBL/(r – 1) MSE
MSE =
Error (r – 1) c – 1) SSE
SSE/[(r – 1)(c– 1)]
Total rc – 1 SST
Chap 11-47
Randomized Block Design:
Example
As production manager, you want
to see if 3 filling machines have Machine1 Machine2
different mean filling times. You Machine3
assign 15 workers with varied 25.40 23.40 20.00
experience into 5 groups of 3
26.31 21.80 22.20
based on similarity of their
experience, and assigned each 24.10 23.50 19.75
group of 3 workers with similar 23.74 22.75 20.60
experience to the machines. At 25.10 21.60 20.40
the .05 significance level, is there
a difference in mean filling times?
Chap 11-48
Example Computation
Machine1 Machine2 Machine3 X 1  24.93 r 5
25.40 23.40 20.00
26.31 21.80 22.20 X 2  22.61 c3
24.10 23.50 19.75 X 3  20.59 n  15
23.74 22.75 20.60
25.10 21.60 20.40 X  22.71
SSA  5  24.93  22.71   22.61  22.71   20.59  22.71 
 2 2 2
 
 47.164
SSE  8.4025
MSA  SSA /(c -1)  47.16 / 2  23.5820
MSE  SSE / (r -1)  c  1   8.4025 / 8  1.0503
Chap 11-49
Example: Summary Table

Among SSA= MSA = 23.582/1.0503

2
Groups 47.164 23.582 =22.452
Among SSBL= MSBL = .6627/1.0503

4
Blocks 2.6507 .6627 =.6039
SSE= MSE =
Error 
8.4025 1.0503
SST=
Total 14
58.2172
Chap 11-50
Example: Solution
H0: 1 = 2 = 3 Test Statistic:
 = .05 F   22.45
df1= 2 df2 = 8 MSE 1.0503
Critical Value(s): Decision:

Reject at  = 0.05.
There is evidence that at
least one  j differs from
0 4.46 F the rest.
Chap 11-51
in Excel
 Tools | Data Analysis | ANOVA: Two Factor
Without Replication
 Example Solution in Excel Spreadsheet
Microsoft Excel
Worksheet
Chap 11-52
The Tukey Procedure
 Similar to the Tukey Procedure for the
Completely Randomized Design Case
 Critical Range
MSE

Critical Range  QU ( c , r 1  c 1 )
r
Chap 11-53
The Tukey Procedure: Example
1. Compute absolute mean
Machine1 Machine2 Machine3 differences:
25.40 23.40 20.00
X 1  X 2  24.93  22.61  2.32
26.31 21.80 22.20
24.10 23.50 19.75 X 1  X 3  24.93  20.59  4.34
23.74 22.75 20.60
25.10 21.60 20.40 X 2  X 3  22.61  20.59  2.02
2. Compute critical range:
MSE 1.0503
Critical Range  QU ( c , r 1  c 1 )  4.04 1.8516
r 5
3. All of the absolute mean differences are greater. There
is a significance difference between each pair of means at
5% level of significance.
Chap 11-54
Two-Way ANOVA
 Examines the Effect of:
 Two factors on the dependent variable
 E.g., Percent carbonation and line speed on soft
drink bottling process
 Interaction between the different levels of these
two factors
 E.g., Does the effect of one particular percentage of
carbonation depend on which level the line speed is
set?
Chap 11-55
Two-Way ANOVA (continued)
 Assumptions
 Normality
 Populations are normally distributed
 Homogeneity of Variance
 Populations have equal variances
 Independence of Errors
 Independent random samples are drawn
Chap 11-56
Two-Way ANOVA
Total Variation Partitioning
Variation Due to SSA +

Factor A d.f.= r-1
SSB +
Variation Due to
d.f.= c-1
Total Variation Factor B
Variation Due to SSAB +

SST
= Interaction d.f.= (r-1)(c-1)
d.f.= n-1
Variation Due to SSE
Random Sampling d.f.= rc(n’-1)
Chap 11-57
Two-Way ANOVA
Total Variation Partitioning
r  the number of levels of factor A

c  the number of levels of factor B
n  the number of values (replications) for each cell
'
n  the total number of observations in the experiment

X ijk  the value of the k -th observation for level i of
factor A and level j of factor B
Chap 11-58
Total Variation
 
r c n' 2
SST   X ijk  X
i 1 j 1 k 1
Sum of Squares Total

= total variation among all
observations around the grand mean
r c n' r c n'
 X
i 1 j 1 k 1
ijk  X
i 1 j 1 k 1
ijk
X  '

rcn n
 the overall or grand mean Chap 11-59
Factor A Variation
 
r 2
SSA  cn  X i  X
'
i 1
Sum of Squares Due to Factor A

= the difference among the means of
the various levels of factor A and the
grand mean
Chap 11-60
Factor B Variation
 
c 2
SSB  rn  X  j   X
'
j 1
Sum of Squares Due to Factor B

= the difference among the means of
the various levels of factor B and the
grand mean
Chap 11-61
Interaction Variation
 
r c 2
SSAB  n  X ij   X i  X  j   X
'
i 1 j 1
Sum of Squares Due to Interaction between A and B

= the effect of the combinations of factor A and
factor B
Chap 11-62
Random Error
2
n'
 
r c
SSE   X ijk  X ij 
i 1 j 1 k 1
Sum of Squares Error

= the differences among the observations within
each cell and the corresponding cell means
Chap 11-63
Two-Way ANOVA:
The F Test Statistic
H0: 1 ..= 2 .. = ••• = r .. F Test for Factor A Main Effect
MSA SSA Reject if
F MSA 
MSE r 1 F > FU
H1: Not all i .. are equal
H0: 1. = .2. = ••• = c. F Test for Factor B Main Effect
MSB SSB Reject if
F MSB 
H1: Not all .j. are equal MSE c 1 F > FU
H0: ij = 0 (for all i and j) F Test for Interaction Effect

MSAB SSAB Reject if
H1: ij  0 F MSAB 
MSE  r  1  c  1 F > FU
Chap 11-64
Two-Way ANOVA
Summary Table
Factor A MSA = MSA/
r–1 SSA
(Row) SSA/(r – 1) MSE
Factor B MSB = MSB/
c–1 SSB
(Column) SSB/(c – 1) MSE
AB MSAB = MSAB/
(r – 1)(c – 1) SSAB
(Interaction) SSAB/ [(r – 1)(c – 1)] MSE
MSE =
Error rc n – 1)
’
SSE
SSE/[rc n’ – 1)]
Total rc n’ – 1 SST
Chap 11-65
Features of Two-Way ANOVA
F Test
 Degrees of Freedom Always Add Up
 rcn’-1=rc(n’-1)+(c-1)+(r-1)+(c-1)(r-1)
 Total=Error+Column+Row+Interaction
 The Denominator of the F Test is Always the
Same but the Numerator is Different
 The Sums of Squares Always Add Up
 Total=Error+Column+Row+Interaction
Chap 11-66
Kruskal-Wallis Rank Test
 Used to Analyze Completely Randomized
Experimental Designs
 Extension of Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test
 Tests the equality of more than 2 population
medians
 Distribution-Free Test Procedure
 Use 2 Distribution to Approximate if Each
Sample Group Size nj > 5
 df = c – 1
Chap 11-67
 Assumptions
 Independent random samples are drawn
 Continuous dependent variable
 Data may be ranked both within and among
samples
 Populations have same variability
 Populations have same shape
 Robust with Regard to Last 2 Conditions
 Use F test in completely randomized designs and
when the more stringent assumptions hold
Chap 11-68
Procedure
 Obtain Ranks
 In event of tie, each of the tied values gets their
average rank
 Add the Ranks for Data from Each of the c
 12 c T2 
H  
Groups j
  3(n  1)
  n(ton obtain
Square
1) j 1 Tn j2 
j
n  n1  n2    nc
Chap 11-69
Procedure (continued)
 Compute Test Statistic

 12 c T2 
 H   j
  3(n  1)
 n(n  1) j 1 n j 
 n  n1  n2    nc
 n j  # of observation in the j –th sample ; ( j =
1, 2, …, c )
 T  sum of the ranks assigned to the j –th
j
sample
j  square of T j
2
 T
 H may be approximated by chi-square

distribution with df = c –1 when each nj >5 Chap 11-70
Procedure (continued)
 Critical Value for a Given 

 Upper tail  2
U
 Decision Rule
 Reject H0: M1 = M2 = ••• = Mc if test statistic
H > U
2
 Otherwise, do not reject H0
Chap 11-71
Kruskal-Wallis Rank Test:
Example
Machine1 Machine2
As production manager, you Machine3
want to see if 3 filling machines 25.40 23.40 20.00
have different median filling 26.31 21.80 22.20
times. You assign 15 similarly
24.10 23.50 19.75
trained & experienced workers,
23.74 22.75 20.60
5 per machine, to the
25.10 21.60 20.40
machines. At the .05
significance level, is there a
difference in median filling
times?
Chap 11-72
Example Solution: Step 1
Obtaining a Ranking
Raw Data Ranks
Machine1 Machine2 Machine1 Machine2
Machine3 Machine3
25.40 23.40 20.00 14 9 2
26.31 21.80 22.20 15 6 7
24.10 23.50 19.75 12 10 1
23.74 22.75 20.60 11 8 4
25.10 21.60 20.40 13
65 5
38 3
17
Chap 11-73
Example Solution: Step 2
Test Statistic Computation
 T 2 
 12 c j 
H     3(n  1)
n(n  1) j  1 n
 j
 
 12  652 382 17 2  
       3(15  1)
15(15  1)  5 5 5 
  
 11.58
Chap 11-74
Kruskal-Wallis Test Example
Solution
H0: M1 = M2 = M3 Test Statistic:
H1: Not all equal H = 11.58
 = .05
df = c - 1 = 3 - 1 = 2 Decision:
Critical Value(s): Reject at  = .05.
Conclusion:
 = .05
There is evidence that
population medians are
not all equal.
0 5.991
Chap 11-75
Kruskal-Wallis Test in PHStat
 PHStat | c-Sample Tests | Kruskal-Wallis Rank
Sum Test …
 Example Solution in Excel Spreadsheet
Microsoft Excel
Worksheet
Chap 11-76
Friedman Rank Test
 Used to Analyze Randomized Block
Experimental Designs
 Tests the equality of more than 2 population
medians
 Distribution-Free Test Procedure
 Use 2 Distribution to Approximate if the
Number of Blocks r > 5
 df = c – 1
Chap 11-77
Friedman Rank Test
 Assumptions
 The r blocks are independent
 The random variable is continuous
 The data constitute at least an ordinal scale of
measurement
 No interaction between the r blocks and the c
treatment levels
 The c populations have the same variability
 The c populations have the same shape
Chap 11-78
Friedman Rank Test:
Procedure
 Replace the c observations by their ranks in
each of the r blocks; assign average rank
for ties
c
12
 Test statistic: FR  
rc  c  1 j 1
R j  3r  c  1
2
 R.j2 is the square of the rank total for group j

 FR can be approximated by a chi-square
distribution with (c –1) degrees of freedom
 The rejection region is in the right tail
Chap 11-79
Friedman Rank Test: Example
As production manager, you want
to see if 3 filling machines have Machine1 Machine2
different median filling times. You
Machine3
assign 15 workers with varied
experience into 5 groups of 3 25.40 23.40 20.00
based on similarity of their 26.31 21.80 22.20
experience, and assigned each
group of 3 workers with similar
24.10 23.50 19.75
experience to the machines. At 23.74 22.75 20.60
the .05 significance level, is there 25.10 21.60 20.40
a difference in median filling
times?
Chap 11-80
Friedman Rank Test:
Computation Table
Timing Rank
Machine 1 Machine 2 Machine 3 Machine 1 Machine 2 Machine 3
25.4 23.4 20 3 2 1
26.31 21.8 22.2 3 1 2
24.1 23.5 19.75 3 2 1
23.74 22.75 20.6 3 2 1
25.1 21.6 20.4 3 2 1
R. j 15 9 6
R.2j 225 81 36
c
12
FR 
rc  c  1
  j  3r  c  1
R 2
j 1
12
  342   3  5  4   8.4
 5   3  4  Chap 11-81
Friedman Rank Test Example
Solution
H0: M1 = M2 = M3 Test Statistic:
H1: Not all equal FR = 8.4
 = .05
df = c - 1 = 3 - 1 = 2 Decision:
Critical Value: Reject at  = .05
Conclusion:
 = .05
There is evidence that
population medians are
not all equal.
0 5.991
Chap 11-82
Chapter Summary
 Described the Completely Randomized
Design: One-Way Analysis of Variance
 ANOVA Assumptions
 F Test for Differences in More than Two Means
 The Tukey-Kramer Procedure
 Levene’s Test for Homogeneity of Variance
 Discussed the Randomized Block Design
 F Test for the Difference in More than Two Means
 The Tukey Procedure
Chap 11-83
Chapter Summary (continued)
 Described the Factorial Design: Two-Way

Analysis of Variance
 Examine effects of factors and interaction
 Discussed Kruskal-Wallis Rank Test:
Nonparametric Analysis for the Completely
Randomized Design
 Illustrated Friedman Rank Test:
Nonparametric Analysis for the Randomized
Block Design
Chap 11-84

Basic Business Statistics: Analysis of Variance

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Basic Business Statistics: Analysis of Variance

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Basic Business Statistics

© 2004 Prentice-Hall, Inc. Chap 11-1

 The Factorial Design: Two-Way Analysis of

Factor (Training Method)

 Populations have equal variances

Variation Due to Variation Due to Random

X ij : the i -th observation in group j

X  the overall or grand mean

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

X j : The sample mean of group j

 j  j' Variation Due to Differences Among Groups

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

Summing the variation

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3

 If the Null Hypothesis is False

As production manager, you Machine1 Machine2

SSA  5  24.93  22.71   22.61  22.71   20.59  22.71 

1. For each observation in each group, obtain

As production manager, you Machine1 Machine2

Time abs(Time - median(Time))

H0:  12   22   32 Test Statistic:

0 3.89 F from the rest.

SSA  Among Groups Variation

Sampling  Sum of Squares

r  the number of blocks

Source of Degrees of Sum of Mean F

Among MSA = MSA/

Among MSBL = MSBL/

Source of Degrees of Sum of Mean F

Among SSA= MSA = 23.582/1.0503

Among SSBL= MSBL = .6627/1.0503

Critical Value(s): Decision:

Variation Due to SSA +

Variation Due to SSAB +

r  the number of levels of factor A

n  the total number of observations in the experiment

Sum of Squares Total

Sum of Squares Due to Factor A

Sum of Squares Due to Factor B

Sum of Squares Due to Interaction between A and B

Sum of Squares Error

each cell and the corresponding cell means

H0: ij = 0 (for all i and j) F Test for Interaction Effect

 Compute Test Statistic

 H may be approximated by chi-square

© 2004 Prentice-Hall, Inc.

 Critical Value for a Given 

 Otherwise, do not reject H0

 R.j2 is the square of the rank total for group j

 Described the Factorial Design: Two-Way

You might also like